Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Re: W3C ridiculous new policy on patents
 I think you're point's well stated, Len. W3C is not a body in pursuit of the public interest. So it seems like those whose interests favor free, unfettered base technologies for the web need seek appeal and refuge elsewhere. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 10:58 AM > To: Frank Richards > Cc: xml-dev@l... > Subject: RE: Re: W3C ridiculous new policy on patents > > > He is talking about things he think may have happened, > that do not happen in all cases, and are the very reasons > if they do happen that a W3C policy for patents is > required. The only issue at hand is the specification > of non-RF technologies in their products. That should > be discouraged but there are different means and that > is why the policy has to be scrutinized. It may be > that the definitions of scope and means for specifications > and standards have to be made clearer, the work involved > in creating a WG and administering it made harder and more > rigorous, and the W3C must more carefully cherry pick its > projects and engage in more direct cooperation with the > national standards bodies whose governments do represent > public interests. > > The patent attack topics are a red herring that allows > people to ignore the issue that the Internet is not > the W3C's to govern in the public's interest. The W3C > does not represent the public. This is a different topic > but one that becomes increasingly relevant as some > try to use the issues of the patent-policy to attach > their beliefs about the patent laws to the W3C. I > think they do neither their cause nor the W3C much > good with that tactic. The morals of the W3C members > are the business of the individual members. The > W3C is only responsible for its policies. The nut > mail that seeks to force the members to their will > will be ignored and attempts to execute actions > such as some have proposed prosecuted. I suggest > everyone ramp down their rhetoric. The W3C will > issue its policy in due time and those subject > to that authority will make their decision vis > a vis their responses to it. > > len > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Richards [mailto:frichards@s...] > > >Yet a lot of the obvious enhancements > >get patented. > > I don't think so. Some do but the patent office isn't quite > that stupid. > > Yep, once the Patent Office has issued a bogopatent to some > BigCo for every > significant programming technique invented between 1946 and 1991 they > probably will do a fairly good job of only issuing patents for real > improvements. > > >Or is every hobbyist entitled to their own bigco who'll pay > the lawyer's > >fees to attack bogus patents? > > Every hobbyist is entitled to give away that which is theirs > to dispose > of in the manner and to whom they see fit. They aren't entitled to > do that with the property of others. > > Len, You're saying how the system is supposed to work. He's > talking about > how it's actually broken. You're talking past each other. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> > 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
